John Ure’s Post

Weather or Climate? “Land temperatures in March were 14.14C, exceeding the previous high set in March 2016 by 0.1C. This was 1.68C above the pre-industrial average for the month of March, and for the 12-month period it surpassed the 1850 to 1900 average by 1.58C” (FT 10th April 2024) Climatologists differentiate between weather and climate by tracking the latter for consistent observations over at least 30 years. For sure, 12 months is not yet 30 years, but as argued below, the real issue is science-based risk assessment. The science has uncertainties as the models struggle with the immense complexities of their subject. Climate sceptics (ignore the deniers as ideologues) are scientists who question the models and their predictions, albeit too often funded by the fossil fuel industry or representing highly conservative think-tanks. Despite this, their arguments still need to be addressed through science. The implications are too grave to ignore. A key issue is that in science uncertainty comes in the form of probability, and at the heart of the debates are the risks associated with those probabilities. We should all hope the sceptics are correct, but science as it stands requires us to doubt that conclusion. I am currently ploughing my way through the arguments for a book on climate change and global warming, seriously trying to get a handle on these issues. I am an economist not a climatologist (any out there with advice?) and nor are the general public, but a respect for science and a basic understanding of the issues (including the methodologies) is essential for evidence-based policy making. For anyone interested in following the sources of disagreement, a helpful starting point is Skeptical Science at https://lnkd.in/gXxK-NJd. There are Youtube videos galore on both sides of the argument.

Climate Misinformation by Source: John Christy

Climate Misinformation by Source: John Christy

skepticalscience.com

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics